Re: remaining sql/json patches
От | Amit Langote |
---|---|
Тема | Re: remaining sql/json patches |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+HiwqHYsPEH0Y1d6pbcVr+n99zbsGPAWmP4cuQvPHaTjJJdoQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: remaining sql/json patches (Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: remaining sql/json patches
Re: remaining sql/json patches |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 9:20 PM Nikita Malakhov <hukutoc@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > The main goal was to correctly process invalid queries (as in examples above). > I'm not sure this could be done in type input functions. I thought that some > coercions could be checked before evaluating expressions for saving reasons. I assume by "invalid" you mean queries specifying types in RETURNING that don't support soft-error handling in their input function. Adding a check makes sense but its implementation should include a type cache interface to check whether a given type has error-safe input handling, possibly as a separate patch. IOW, the SQL/JSON patch shouldn't really make a list of types to report as unsupported. -- Thanks, Amit Langote EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: